Graffiti mars the outside of a now closed Shell gas station in Broad Ripple. A development that would include a Whole Foods grocery store has been proposed for the site. / Matthew Tully/The Star

Written by

OK, that’s enough talk. It’s time to put an end to the tortured, overblown, exaggeration-filled debate over, of all things, a new Whole Foods in Broad Ripple.

The development has been labeled by a small but determined band of critics as everything from an end to Broad Ripple as we know it to a symbol of all things bad and greedy in America, circa 2013.

Enough.

In the end, the development is both logical and, speaking as a longtime resident of the area, welcome.

It’s an encouraging sign of what could be in Broad Ripple. It’s a nice detour from the over-reliance on bars in what still is a contender for Indianapolis’ coolest neighborhood. It’s a potential kick-start for future smart growth. And, despite what some are saying, it’s not anything to get worked up over.

It’s a Whole Foods, for goodness sake. It’s a grocery store, not a landfill.

I’m all for public policy discussions, but do we really need a six-month debate about a proposal to allow an upscale grocery store to move into the city? Do we really need to make it so hard for developers to bring improvements to an area that, quite frankly, can use a freshening-up? Do we really need another disincentive to those businesses who might see higher incomes and less hassles a few miles north in Hamilton County?

These thoughts struck me as I drove past the proposed development site over the weekend. It is just north of College and Broad Ripple avenues and now houses a former Shell gas station that has been empty for more than four years. There’s also a group of 80-year-old apartments that are not aging well and would be replaced with 103 new units.

The Shell site is now covered with weeds, broken concrete and trash. The boarded-up building has been an eyesore for years and now hosts large displays of spray-painted graffiti. More graffiti can be found on a metal structure near the building, above a scattered collection of beer bottles and soda cans.

“Yeah, a Whole Foods would really trash up the joint,” I said as I drove by the site.

(Page 2 of 3)

Now one thing I’ve noticed about this debate is that people have used it to argue about what they’d like to see on that corner — a Trader Joe’s or a variety of other businesses — as if we can force specific retailers to build on a specific site. Some have said it should be a park, as if the owners of the property will simply donate the site to the city, and as if the sprawling Broad Ripple Park doesn’t sit about a mile away.

In reality, it’s important to consider what is versus what could be. And there are two current options for this site: One is to turn it into a Whole Foods, complete with an impressive landscaping plan and the potential to begin sprucing up around the canal. The other is to leave it as it is. Let’s be clear, this site has been empty for years and if this deal falls through it’ll be empty for the foreseeable future.

Critics have bemoaned the potential arrival of a chain grocery store. They have hoisted signs and filled Facebook with the message: “Keep Broad Ripple local.” I greatly admire their protest spirit and the idea of supporting local businesses. But the reality is that the store would simply replace what was a non-local chain gas station, and that the site sits across from a chain drug store and just a short walk from a Subway, a Kroger, a McDonald’s, a Qdoba, a Starbucks, an Applebee’s, a Jimmy John’s, a Noodles & Company, an Einstein Bros. Bagels, and several banks — all non-local chains.

I love Broad Ripple’s local businesses. I wrote this column Tuesday morning over breakfast at Biscuit’s Restaurant. I’ve purchased many anniversary presents at Chelsea’s. I used to go to the gym there, until it was replaced by another bar. I love killing time at Indy CD and Vinyl. I’ve spent hours at Hubbard & Cravens coffee shop. But to suggest that Whole Foods would alter the tenor of Broad Ripple ingores what already exists in the neighborhood, and the ability of a neighborhood’s vibe to survive a few chains.

An understandable force behind the project’s opposition has been concern over the future of Good Earth Natural Foods, a small local store that sits just east of the proposed development. Personally, I think the store will be fine. Stores like that one exist because of deeply loyal customers, not because of a lack of competition. Anyway, in a free market it’s not government’s job to protect businesses from competition.

(Page 3 of 3)

Ultimately, this debate has made clear that the Whole Foods development would improve Broad Ripple. It would infuse the area north of the strip with new life and, I hope, provide a spark for the long-stalled plan to better use the canal walkway. It would brings jobs and money into the neighborhood and give outsiders a new reason to visit, helping many local businesses. It would help diversify the commercial makeup of the area. It would send a message to developers that the city is open for business.

The city’s Metropolitan Development Commission will hold a hearing on the proposal, after recent delays, on Oct. 2. Protesters will come out and they should be heard. But their complaints are just one side of the story.

As I stood on the site of the empty gas station Tuesday morning, hundreds of commuters passed by on College Avenue. What they saw was an advertisement for decay, an eyesore, and a prominent site that has been vacant for years. What they could see, if the city does the right thing, is new life and a new reason to come to Broad Ripple.

It’s good that we’ve had this debate. But it’s gone on long enough. It is time to say yes to Whole Foods.